ArticleNursing in critical care2026
Working With AI and Robotic Systems While Preserving Clinical Judgement, Professional Accountability and Person-Centred Care: Critical Care Nurses' Perspectives.
Article in Nursing in critical care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe integration of AI and robotic systems into critical care necessitates examining how ICU nurses preserve clinical judgement, professional accountability and person-centred care while using these technologies.
aimsTo explore ICU nurses' perceptions of AI and robotic systems in critical care, focusing on clinical judgement, trust, responsibility, professional roles and person-centred care. STUDY
designA qualitative descriptive study using scenario-based elicitation was conducted. Data were collected through seven semi-structured focus group discussions (FGDs) with 38 ICU nurses working in general, paediatric and cardiovascular surgery ICUs in two hospitals in Istanbul City. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, supported by MAXQDA 2024.
findingsFour themes were developed: negotiating trust in AI-supported critical care; preserving human authority, accountability and boundaries; protecting the human core of intensive care nursing; and reimagining AI and robotic systems as supportive partners. ICU nurses evaluated these systems through bedside verification, patient safety, professional responsibility and person-centred care. AI recommendations were useful only when nurses could question, verify, delay or override them according to the patient's current condition. Robotic systems were valuable when they reduced documentation or physical workload, but not when they replaced clinical judgement, emotional presence, reassurance or accountability.
conclusionsICU nurses conceptualised AI and robotic systems as acceptable only when clinically verifiable, professionally bounded and subordinate to human judgement. The findings support a model of AI- and robot-supported ICU care that is responsible, human-led and person-centred. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: AI and robotic systems should be implemented in ways that strengthen, rather than replace, nurses' clinical judgement, accountability and bedside presence. Clear protocols are needed to verify AI outputs, define robotic task boundaries, support nurses' authority to question or override recommendations and preserve person-centred care in technologically intensive ICU environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.